Ted CruzПодлинная учетная запись

Boy, there’s really no limit to the shit you’ll eat for the sake of your ambition. Let me do you a favor. You’ll never be president. Now act like a man and defend your father and wife.

Nor will he have his seat come November. Vote Beto!!! @BetoORourke

Free speech is one thing. Hate speech is another. Know the difference. VOTE BETO!!!!

And slander, and libel, and..... I mean.... those are LAWS, so clearly Cruz is unfit for office since he doesn’t seem to understand them! #BetoForTexas

He's promoting state sponsored propaganda with his official account. Like Alex Jones clearly likes to tell mistruths to forward a fear based agenda and one of the two highest ranking civilian leaders in our country supporting him. #BetoForTexas

Lmao...wow, you really stretched for that one.

Alex Jones is NOT a journalist. Ted Cruz supporting conspiracy theories is detrimental to democracy and doesn't even warrant air time from a US senator. He lowers the office and all offices equal to it. I can't vote for someone who thinks it's OK to say Sandy hook was fake.

Facebook is a private company and can dictate what content it wants or doesn't want. What's amazing is that you are a Senator who apparently doesn't understand how the 1st Amendment works.

@tedcruz is horrible. In everyway. How he became a US Senator is a mystery.

The principle of free speech is independent of the first amendment. Absent his gratuitous first amendment hashtag at the end, this is a perfectly reasonable statement. All restrictions on free speech cut both ways.

The right to free speech has already been shown to have reasonable limits such as not shouting “FIRE” in a crowded theater Seems trying to convince millions of people that their government is terminally corrupt and may need to be violently overthrown is similar

I think it is reasonable to bend over backwards to protect political free speech, no matter how reprehensible. I don't deny there are limits, but defining those limits is next to impossible. On the other hand, Facebook is entitled to its own judgement on its platform.

We need to have some sense of a line, even if that line is a wide gray band If unsure we should err on the side of protecting free speech But the current situation is detrimental to our ability to argue facts between sides and that is risking the function of democracy

There is a line. The first step to determine if free speech is being infringed is to look at who is restricting the speech. Private entity on their property, no problem. Government in any forum, potential problem. FB is a private company placing restrictions on their property.

Wouldn’t trump’s attacks on NFL players be considered government infringement on their 1A, especially given owners have said trump has been a major reason behind their policy decisions & Kap being blacklisted, some even testifying under oath trump was reason?

If only NFL players were represented by a wealthy union that could litigate this issue.

SCOTUS ruled in 1942 at height of WW2 that people could not be compelled to take a patriotic act or gesture. Argument now is that private companies (NFL teams) can force their employees to do what they want That was same argument then, hence the "Locker room" opt out as a fudge